What do new lands need?

D

DisneyFanatic12

Well-Known Member
Here’s another one that I think is important. Nooks and crannies in the land have already been said, but if the land is meant to be “explored”, then there should be a hidden (or not so hidden) walking trail or similar attraction to stumble upon and explore. Something like Moana JoW (not Moana themed though, or water cycle themed, obviously) in Pandora would make the land just that much more immersive IMO. The Mountain Overlook Trail at Typhoon Lagoon, for instance, makes the theming and immersion all so much better if you happen to stumble across it.
 
D

DisneyHead123

Well-Known Member
DisneyFanatic12 said:
Here’s something that hasn’t been said (I think) but I think is important… visibly moving elements. Pandora does this well enough with all of the water features, but holy cow does GE need a moving piece to it. There should have been some ride like the People Mover (since I feel like that could blend in fairly easily) that visibly moved throughout the land. And maybe a nice waterfall or two. Without anything that really moves, the land always feels lifeless to me. Which is the only thing that really takes me out of the setting there. In the Star Wars universe, I feel like things are moving EVERYWHERE, but in GE there’s essentially no movement whatsoever.
Click to expand...
I think movement can be a good thing but has to be used very carefully. If you look at two extreme ends of the spectrum - on one hand very natural, gentle movement like water can be soothing. Probably why so many dentist's offices have fish tanks. On the other, the rapid movement of light can literally trigger a seizure in susceptible people because it's so overstimulating. I agree that movement of the sort you see in the windows of Main Street or Potter World shops can make a land feel more alive. Again, I think it has to be used carefully though, because it can become overstimulating quickly.

I also think GE looks very "still" because there's not a lot of color contrast. My assumption is that it was made kinda gloomy and un-colorful because it was supposed to be an answer to that look at Potter Word. I haven't spent time in GE yet (have primarily just walked by it,) and I've never been to the Harry Potter lands at Universal. From looking at videos, though, what sets them apart is that in Potter World the mundane, gloomy backdrop of an old timey London-esque setting highlights the thrill of "magic" shining through at various points. It sort of builds the anticipation or creates a contrast. Whereas in GE, they could have gone a similar route with "The Force", but my impression is that instead the "living under an oppression regime of Stormtroopers" is more the primary vibe. It would be like if Potter World existed within a storyline wherein Voldemort had taken over and you're running around hiding from him. It's a bit glum. While it does look like an impressive land, I wonder if the vibe would be different if it was entirely a rebel haven, and you could see The Force in action at various points. A CM dressed as a rebel "levitates" an object, there's kyber crystals embedded in a rock fixture that glow when you touch them, stuff like that.
 
K

Kev1982

Well-Known Member
Surfin' Tuna said:
I almost specifically said, "no spinners," when I first responded. I think you could make an argument that every park might need a spinner, although I do not necessarily agree. Adding a spinner to every land, however, can over be quite detrimental. When they added the magic carpet spinner to adventure land, they ruined that area. The spinner they chose for Toy Story land was also a really bad option, but at least there is a second new attraction in that land. I cannot imagine them trying to add a spinner into Epcot, although I would not put it past them. No more spinners, please.
Click to expand...
Tangled spinner from Paris coming up…😂
 
J

JMcMahonEsq

Well-Known Member
Andrew25 said:
From a design perspective, indoor areas that can be explored. The parks have more than enough outdoor areas to roam about... it's time to start providing relief from the brutal Florida weather.

From a content perspective, high-capacity experiences like a continuous theater or dark rides that don't require 30+ minute waits. I'm all for big flashy E-tickets... but we need Muppet*Vision/Living with the Land style experiences as well.
Click to expand...
How do you get a dark ride that doesn't get you 30min+ waits?

I can only think of 2 ways this happens, 1) you're building the ride with such loading capacity/throughput that everyone is getting on the ride so quickly that you don't get a line building to 30Min. or 2) the ride isn't that popular, such that you never have enough people wanting to ride the ride such that the line never backs up to 30+min.

I absolutely love Living with the Land. It's one of my absolute favorite rides. But I don't ride coaster/thrill rides. hell the people mover is in my top 10 Disney rides. Absent absolutely crazy park days, i don't generally ever see a big interest in LwtL, not anywhere near other experiences. Parks need experiences/rides that people want to experience. I don't see the benefit of building anything new where the best selling point for it is that interest in it is going to be low enough that wait times won't be very high.

I think the alternative is ride structures like Flight of Pandora, or Soaring. 1 line that leads to multiple theater type set ups so that you can have multiple rides going at the same time. It also if built modularly, gives you the ability to expand with a new theater if demand is very high.
 
Andrew25

Andrew25

Well-Known Member
JMcMahonEsq said:
How do you get a dark ride that doesn't get you 30min+ waits?

I can only think of 2 ways this happens, 1) you're building the ride with such loading capacity/throughput that everyone is getting on the ride so quickly that you don't get a line building to 30Min. or 2) the ride isn't that popular, such that you never have enough people wanting to ride the ride such that the line never backs up to 30+min.

I absolutely love Living with the Land. It's one of my absolute favorite rides. But I don't ride coaster/thrill rides. hell the people mover is in my top 10 Disney rides. Absent absolutely crazy park days, i don't generally ever see a big interest in LwtL, not anywhere near other experiences. Parks need experiences/rides that people want to experience. I don't see the benefit of building anything new where the best selling point for it is that interest in it is going to be low enough that wait times won't be very high.

I think the alternative is ride structures like Flight of Pandora, or Soaring. 1 line that leads to multiple theater type set ups so that you can have multiple rides going at the same time. It also if built modularly, gives you the ability to expand with a new theater if demand is very high.
Click to expand...
High-capacity dark rides like PoTC/Haunted Mansion (when working efficiently) rarely exceed actual waits beyond 30-45 minutes. When you build a massive park filled with them (like Epcot opening day) you don't have multiple hour+ waits.

Frozen would be a 30 minute at most each day if it had a similar ride system to PotC.
 
J

JMcMahonEsq

Well-Known Member
Andrew25 said:
High-capacity dark rides like PoTC/Haunted Mansion (when working efficiently) rarely exceed actual waits beyond 30-45 minutes. When you build a massive park filled with them (like Epcot opening day) you don't have multiple hour+ waits.

Frozen would be a 30 minute at most each day if it had a similar ride system to PotC.
Click to expand...
To be fair, I don't think i have ridden either ride without a FP or Genie over the last 10 years, with the exception of a holiday party, or right after the park opened from covid and it was basically a ghostown in August with the southern kids back in school. I certainly see posted wait times above 30min every day for both rides, but I don't have any data to really compare posted wait vs actual wait time,

That being said, on whole, I totally get behind the idea that a new land should have a ride of the type and quality of PotC or HH. But i think it needs to be both. It should be available to ride for almost the entire park market/age ranges, either no or very low heigh requirements. And it should be to the scale of those rides, not a Poo Bear ride or even little mermaid (which pains me to say as Little Mermaid is one of my favorite rides, from a personal nostalgic perspective.)
 
Andrew25

Andrew25

Well-Known Member
JMcMahonEsq said:
To be fair, I don't think i have ridden either ride without a FP or Genie over the last 10 years, with the exception of a holiday party, or right after the park opened from covid and it was basically a ghostown in August with the southern kids back in school. I certainly see posted wait times above 30min every day for both rides, but I don't have any data to really compare posted wait vs actual wait time,

That being said, on whole, I totally get behind the idea that a new land should have a ride of the type and quality of PotC or HH. But i think it needs to be both. It should be available to ride for almost the entire park market/age ranges, either no or very low heigh requirements. And it should be to the scale of those rides, not a Poo Bear ride or even little mermaid (which pains me to say as Little Mermaid is one of my favorite rides, from a personal nostalgic perspective.)
Click to expand...
On your first note, waits are hard to use to judge popularity of an attraction, but an actual wait from the "exterior" queue of Pirates to getting on a boat is rarely ever a 30ish minute wait unless there's a backup with lightning lane. There's a reason why a lot of these omni movers/boat rides don't have much queue space.
 
KikoKea

KikoKea

Well-Known Member
Surfin' Tuna said:
I almost specifically said, "no spinners," when I first responded. I think you could make an argument that every park might need a spinner, although I do not necessarily agree. Adding a spinner to every land, however, can over be quite detrimental. When they added the magic carpet spinner to adventure land, they ruined that area. The spinner they chose for Toy Story land was also a really bad option, but at least there is a second new attraction in that land. I cannot imagine them trying to add a spinner into Epcot, although I would not put it past them. No more spinners, please.
Click to expand...
You are right. Spinners are not the best options in many lands and more than 1 (maybe 2 if it is something cool like Astro Orbiter) spinners in a park isn't good. But, I think each land should have something for younger kids. Spinners seem like a cheap, no thought attraction, but I would like to see Disney come up with some original ideas for kids.
 
D

DisneyHead123

Well-Known Member
KikoKea said:
You are right. Spinners are not the best options in many lands and more than 1 (maybe 2 if it is something cool like Astro Orbiter) spinners in a park isn't good. But, I think each land should have something for younger kids. Spinners seem like a cheap, no thought attraction, but I would like to see Disney come up with some original ideas for kids.
Click to expand...
To me the issue with spinners is that from the perspective of the rider, they’re almost identical. At least the ones that go up in the air. Even if the ride vehicles are different, you only catch a glimpse of them. The primary experience of “go up, spin around” is so similar they may as well be building the same ride in every park.

I feel this way about merry-go-rounds to a lesser extent, which is why I’m not a huge fan of a Coco merry-go-round. They’re visually beautiful but basically a glorified spinner and so common they can be found in some mall food courts at this point. Hard for me to get too jazzed about a new carousel (although again, they at least have the decor factor going for them.)
 
W

WishIWasRetired

Active Member
DisneyHead123 said:
To me the issue with spinners is that from the perspective of the rider, they’re almost identical. At least the ones that go up in the air. Even if the ride vehicles are different, you only catch a glimpse of them. The primary experience of “go up, spin around” is so similar they may as well be building the same ride in every park.

I feel this way about merry-go-rounds to a lesser extent, which is why I’m not a huge fan of a Coco merry-go-round. They’re visually beautiful but basically a glorified spinner and so common they can be found in some mall food courts at this point. Hard for me to get too jazzed about a new carousel (although again, they at least have the decor factor going for them.)
Click to expand...
I agree spinners should be left for carnivals having more than one in a park is redundant.
 
KikoKea

KikoKea

Well-Known Member
DisneyHead123 said:
To me the issue with spinners is that from the perspective of the rider, they’re almost identical. At least the ones that go up in the air. Even if the ride vehicles are different, you only catch a glimpse of them. The primary experience of “go up, spin around” is so similar they may as well be building the same ride in every park.

I feel this way about merry-go-rounds to a lesser extent, which is why I’m not a huge fan of a Coco merry-go-round. They’re visually beautiful but basically a glorified spinner and so common they can be found in some mall food courts at this point. Hard for me to get too jazzed about a new carousel (although again, they at least have the decor factor going for them.)
Click to expand...
True. There are quite a number of options for rides that younger children can enjoy (as well as adults) so there is no reason for only plopping a spinner down to check off a 3rd ride. Bug Land at Cal Adventure had several cute rides along with a few others on the other side of the park that could be adapted to different lands.
 
D

DisneyHead123

Well-Known Member
WishIWasRetired said:
I agree spinners should be left for carnivals having more than one in a park is redundant.
Click to expand...

KikoKea said:
True. There are quite a number of options for rides that younger children can enjoy (as well as adults) so there is no reason for only plopping a spinner down to check off a 3rd ride. Bug Land at Cal Adventure had several cute rides along with a few others on the other side of the park that could be adapted to different lands.
Click to expand...

Agree… I think a spinner probably has the advantage of a relatively small footprint in a land that is more about open green spaces, but I’d rather see a walkthrough that is built into the landscape. Admittedly I’m probably biased because my son can’t tolerate spinner rides, including carousels, lol.

The more I think about it, it seems to me that Disney underutilizes technology to create inexpensive, C and D ticket type attractions. Maybe they want to limit projections and screens in the parks as a matter of principle, and if so, ok, I respect that. But if not… I mean there’s so much you can do on the simplest iPad app now. It seems like it would be easy and probably cost effective to integrate some technology into people eater experiences. Would a walkthrough based on projection mapping be that expensive in terms of Disney budgets? My guess is no, although maybe I’d be surprised. Or something like the interactive lines you see in Mine Train and Winnie the Pooh, where interactive technology is embedded in the architecture. Again, not saying that should be for every attraction, but for people eaters and such it seems underutilized to me.
 

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom